Wouldn't he be complaining that the boots for Tarkin were too big? Makes more sense if he said they were too big but I didn't wanna edit it until someone who knew could explain. - Jinko 22:19, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia links
The intro seems to be heavy with superfluous Wikipedia links to broad concepts like "stage," "radio", and "television." Do we really need to be so pedantic? This isn't a kindergarten reading primer. Anyone who can read at this website's level already knows what those things are. And anyone who doesn't know what England is, probably isn't capable of reading this website.Matthew Babe Stevenson (talk) 18:39, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
- We currently include Wikipedia links in all our OOU articles, such as with the Behind the scenes sections in our food articles (see Ronto Wrap). If we're thinking about changing the way we do Wikipedia links, it'll end up being a site-wide change. I'm willing to have that conversation. What things would you think are best to link to and what things do you think should be avoided? MasterFred
(talk) 22:17, 19 October 2021 (UTC)
- Basic concepts are probably superfluous in terms of linking. Wikipedia linking should probably be used sparingly, for specifically important entities that aren't in Wookieepedia's purview, or a really obscure concept. Everyday objects and concepts are unnecessary to linkage.Matthew Babe Stevenson (talk) 02:38, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
- Ok, so we would need to define "basic concepts," "important entities," and "really obscure concept" if we are to have any hope of making an effective wiki-wide policy on Wikipedia links. Did you have any ideas for such definitions? MasterFred(talk) 10:01, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
- Common sense helps. Things like theatre, television, boots, rowboats, etc., are too trivial. If a Star Wars story names a character after obscure historical quack scientist Franciszek Rychnowski, then that merits a link. Just think of the difference between trivia and trivial.Matthew Babe Stevenson (talk) 10:28, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
- I get what you're saying, and I'm not necessarily opposed. It's just that "common sense" is really hard to enforce as policy since it's not actually a real, objective thing. Common sense is different from person to person. We could try something like, "only links to Wikipedia articles covering topics directly related to the Wookieepedia article's topic." I'd like to keep the links to the various ingredients on our food articles, and this would justify keeping those. —Unsigned comment by Master Fredcerique (talk • contribs)
- Common sense helps. Things like theatre, television, boots, rowboats, etc., are too trivial. If a Star Wars story names a character after obscure historical quack scientist Franciszek Rychnowski, then that merits a link. Just think of the difference between trivia and trivial.Matthew Babe Stevenson (talk) 10:28, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
- Ok, so we would need to define "basic concepts," "important entities," and "really obscure concept" if we are to have any hope of making an effective wiki-wide policy on Wikipedia links. Did you have any ideas for such definitions? MasterFred
- Basic concepts are probably superfluous in terms of linking. Wikipedia linking should probably be used sparingly, for specifically important entities that aren't in Wookieepedia's purview, or a really obscure concept. Everyday objects and concepts are unnecessary to linkage.Matthew Babe Stevenson (talk) 02:38, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
